SME release new Garrard 301

Artisan Fidelity beside restoration of 301s offer a newly manufactured top plate made from milled aluminum billet with a more robust bearing mount, etc. I would think that this would be a large improvement. They have been available for a few years though I am not aware of any review or reports as of yet.

I could be wrong, but I suspect AF sources the chassis you mention from Ray at Classic HiFi in the UK who actually has them custom made by a machine shop vendor in the UK. But that said, what does any of that have to do with whether or not SME is finally about to launch a new Garrard now that they bought the rights? There are lots of third parties who make modified parts for Thorens TD124's and Garrard 301's for the simple reason that both tables have legions of cult fans and there were a huge number of TD124's and 301's manufactured and those that have not been snapped up often need work to bring them up to top performance which then prompts the buyer to think about modifications. For both decks there are third party outfits that produce plinths, idler wheels, bushings, platters, platter bearings, motor brushes, motor mount springs, rubber grommets, and all kinds of things the Brits quaintly call "the bits". 

That's my point. Most of those you mention are not here, nor are they buying hundreds of units from the current refurbishing companies it would seem from the turnaround and length of time they take to sell. So who are these prospective buyers of the "new" SME 301?

Huh. You don't seem to understand the reality of the situation.  Like I said above, the 301 has legions of cult fans. Ken Shindo may have singlehandedly propelled the Japanese collectors from enthusiasts to rabid covetous collectors and then others from the UK, US, and Europe followed. Sure there is a long turnaround when it comes to building a custom plinth or refurbishing a 60+ year old deck that may have been stored in bad conditions or abused somewhere along the way. "Length of time they take to sell"? What exactly is "they"? If you mean $15,000 completed projects from Artisan Fidelity than yeah, there is a limited number of consumers who are willing to spend that much money on a 60+ year old refurbed turntable. So guess what dude; SME can offer a brand new Garrard with no lagtime once they start production and perhaps adopt many of the performance upgrades people have developed over time and perhaps at a competitive price. Technics took a discontinued $400 deck and came out with what at first blush looked like an identical deck that sold for $2,000 on up and SUCCEEDED. And that original turntable was not even considered to be all that good by most of us (though it was the champion of the budget crowd). 

 Sonic, you have kind of skirted the point. If the turntable shown in the photos published by SME is an example of their new product, then it is no different from an Artisan Fidelity or other refurbishment project that we have seen before. Arguably the SME 301 is not even as technically advanced as is the artisan Fidelity product. Because it definitely appears to be based on an original production Garrard 301 chassis. On the other hand technics produced what is really an entirely new turntable with a new motor and Higher quality construction and perhaps made the error of having it look like their old production item. But the new Technics tables are truly new. It remains to be seen whether the new SME 301 will be a truly new turntable or will be like the one shown in their photos.

I agree. That said, it would seem highly unlikely that SME would stamp rather than cast the chassis and that the bearing and platter would be exact replicas of the originals. If you read Mortimer's book on the history of Garrard, you will note that the platter had to be drilled one by one to get optimum balance due to the limitations of casting at the time. I would be shocked if the chassis, bearing and platter are no more than exact replicas of the original. I hope we can agree that it will be fascinating to learn more as the details emerge. The original 301 was conceived as a high torque motor meant to overcome purposeful drag between the bearing and the platter. This was thought to minimize wow and flutter. Is it likely that SME would carry over that approach? I wouldn't think so but we shall see. 

My 301 has been modded with the Peak HiFi (which I believe is CTC) brass bearing, CTC brass platter, and the PSU from Ray at ClassicHiFi. With the PSU, you disable the eddy brake. With the [much] heavier platter, there is no reason to induce drag as the eddy brake was designed to do. When Brian Walsh checked my platter speed with the Feickert Adjust+ software system, my speed was spot-on with very little wow or flutter. 
I am a bit puzzled by Audiofun's comment about the platter "spinning freely". At least on my 301, the platter will not spin freely-the idler wheel-mine is the Audiosliente btw-is always engaged against the inside platter rim. The Garrard (unless I am mistaken) was not designed to engage and disengage as the Thorens TD124 was. The "on" lever simply engages the motor and does not trigger engagement of the idler. 

Well noromance, I don't doubt you but I know that my TD124 continues to spin after I turn it off and my 301 platter stops immediately when I turn it off. My 301 platter also does not rotate freely when it is off. Therefore, when installing and aligning cartridges on my TD124 I have to be careful to wedge something against the platter so it will not move. No such need on my 301. This is my first 301 and I don't claim to know how it ought to be, I only know how mine operates. This was true when I was using it with the OEM platter and when I replaced the OEM with teh CTC brass platter. Needless to say, the brass platter has a tremendous amount of inertia weighing 26 lbs, so what accounts for it stopping immediately-or almost-within a quarter rotation at least-when the motor is disengaged?

Thanks for the info Audiofun. I always turn the 301 off using the 301 on/off lever on the left, then and only then do I turn off the PSU. I can sometimes be slow as a mule mentally. I personally installed my motor unit from one plinth to my new Layers of Beauty plinth and did the wiring connections and in course of that had ample opportunity to make note of all you have explained and.....failed to note it. I have had the platter off several times and just did so again and it is clear as day that all you say is true. I had never stopped to observe the obvious. I guess my mind was on other things. My linkage works just as you and noromance describe. I can only guess that for whatever reason, the tiny felt brake engages harder than usual or the felt pad is thicker than normal because again, even my heavy brass platter stops within a second. It certainly does not make two revolutions. Oh well, I won’t worry about it. My motor unit was as minty as they come. It merely needed a light cleaning to look brand new. This all comes via the guy behind Classic Thorens/STS-who sold the motor unit to me and installed the Audiosilente idler and new brass main bearing but I believe him.

 Update on SME/Garrard 301 

Very strange. The rep does not make clear if SME intends to ever start from scratch with a new 301 or simply continue to do re-builds of old 301's. It sure seems the latter. SME must have determined that the cost of tooling up to manufacture brand new chassis and all the related parts would never result in profit. That stands to reason. 
And more puzzling-why the ugly plinth and failure to recess the motor unit in the plinth? Why suspend the motor unit and arm separately when the original engineers intended neither to be suspended? 
Granted I have not heard it in action, but on the surface (pun) the project is an utter fail imho.